Executive summary of “How products induce regulatory fit: evidence from the health domain”

Citation

(2015), "Executive summary of “How products induce regulatory fit: evidence from the health domain”", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-09-2015-045

Executive summary of “How products induce regulatory fit: evidence from the health domain”

Article Type: Executive summary and implications for managers and executives From: Journal of Consumer Marketing, Volume 32, Issue 6

This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives a rapid appreciation of the content of this article. Those with a particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of the material present.

Recent decades have seen a considerable rise in health-care expenditure within many developed nations. This increase is particularly evident for illnesses and conditions attributed to lifestyle. Consequently, persuading individuals to engage in healthier behaviors has become a major priority for health practitioners and associated government bodies. Communication which promotes a healthy lifestyle is a major tactic used by health agencies, meaning that messages must be carefully designed if they are to prove effective.

Work has ascertained that how health messages are processed is influenced by “regulatory focus”. One finding is that people use two “self-regulatory systems” to help them pursue goals. These systems are respectively founded on promotion and prevention. When the emphasis is on the former, goals are perceived as “hopes and aspirations”, and the objective is to secure gains and avoid non-gains. Goals are seen as “duties and obligations” in a prevention condition. Avoiding losses and obtaining non-losses is the primary focus for this regulatory system.

Individuals can lean toward a particular system or usage might be contextually determined. Evidence suggests that personality traits, cultural influence and early childhood experiences shape regulatory focus that is dispositional. It is, therefore, likely that prevention will be the norm among those with strong prevention tendencies, whereas people with a “chronic promotion focus” are inclined to use promotion strategies. In contrast, the situational influences on regulatory focus are usually of a more temporary nature.

Suggestions have been forwarded that products or brands might also influence regulatory focus among consumers. The rationale for this is provided by the fact that products and brands often play an integral part in the pursuit of a specific goal. That someone aiming to lose weight is likely to eat foods marketed as dietary products illustrates this point. Researchers have pointed out that exposure to marketing of certain products or services can serve to trigger the goals which are connected to them. This has been described as a “goal association mechanism” that can shape how consumers subsequently behave. One example is the finding that people behave more unselfishly after being exposed to green products because such products are commonly linked with altruistic goals. Analogous instances are documented in the literature.

In a comparable vein, researchers claim that consumers can be more positive toward products which closely relate to their regulatory focus. This might extend to the importance an individual attaches to specific product attributes.

A core assumption of the current work is that certain health products should strongly relate to a prevention focus in the sense of avoiding poor health. Others, meanwhile, which are marketed as beneficial to health will probably be associated with a promotion focus. Sunscreens which help avoid sunburn and fruit juices to provide energy are examples which reflect prevention and promotion health goals accordingly.

It is similarly posited by Borges and Gomez that the regulatory focus of an individual will be better served by certain goal pursuit strategies than others. To emphasize the point, they cite the case whereby being oriented toward prevention would likely make someone more attracted when greater emphasis is placed on, such as, security and safety. Earlier work suggested that such “regulatory fit” could be achieved by ensuring that message characteristics match with a situational or chronic regulatory focus. Framing the message as a gain can help improve message persuasiveness when the intention is to prompt a promotion focus. The same applies to using a loss frame when the goal is prevention.

Part of the current work involved a pilot study of 37 students from a French business school. The objective was to ascertain if a product would prime the subject’s promotion or prevention focus and then influence a subsequent unrelated task. Based on their inclusion in prior studies, fruit juice and sunscreen were chosen in the expectation that they would respectively activate a promotion and prevention focus. Respondents were asked to imagine they were buying one of these products and had to indicate how they intended to use it. Following this, the unrelated task involved assessing which strategies they felt best prepared students for an upcoming exam. Of the six strategies listed, three were promotion-oriented and the other three prevention-oriented. The study confirmed that products can influence regulatory focus. Subjects primed with fruit juice tended toward promotion strategies for the exam, while prevention strategies were selected more by those primed with sunscreen.

In the first of the two main studies 105 participants were exposed to an advertisement for a fictitious brand of either fruit juice or sunscreen. The advertisement featured either a promotion or prevention regulatory focus with a message framed either as a gain or loss. The subsequent questionnaire addressed attitude toward the product, purchase intention and also checked the manipulation of message framing.

Analysis confirmed the expectation that subjects were likelier to assume they could gain health benefits when exposed to the gain-framed message rather than the loss-framed version. Likewise, loss-framed advertising was more closely associated with the product evoking a focus on prevention. An additional finding was that purchase intention was greater for a promotion product when a gain-framed message was used and greater for the prevention product in the loss-frame condition.

Yoghurt and an elliptical-trainer were added to the fruit juice and sunscreen for the second study as extra promotion and prevention-focused products. This was to eliminate possibilities that earlier results were due to the products rather than regulatory focus. An online advertisement test was created, and the 269 subjects were randomly exposed to one of the four conditions reflecting promotion or prevention and gain or loss message framing. Each of the four advertisements featured one of the study products and a message framed in either gain or loss terms. Message credibility was also tested here through responses to statements about the ad being credible, trustworthy and believable. Credibility was perceived as greater in promotion-gain and prevention-loss conditions. Indications for attitude and purchase intention were comparable with the first study in that the impact was more positive when promotion focus was matched with gain message framing or a prevention focus matched with a message emphasizing loss.

On this evidence, the authors urge marketers to select messages depending on whether the product is oriented toward promotion or prevention. The emphasis should accordingly be on benefits of using the advertised product or potential risk of not using it. They similarly advise where health communication is concerned. Messages should be framed in either gain or loss terms depending on which regulatory focus is associated with the product. A comparable approach to social marketing which aims to improve general health is likewise recommended.

Future research might consider products where the link to a particular regulatory focus is less certain. Borges and Gomez also suggest using neutral brands to eliminate the possibility that priming might result from the brand name rather than the product. An investigation of brands, services or other marketing objects is another research option, as is ascertaining how to best frame messages which urge the public to minimize the consumption of unhealthy products like alcohol and tobacco. The relationship between regulatory focus primed by products and dispositional regulatory focus could be explored too.

To read the full article enter 10.1108/JCM-01-2015-1292 into your search engine.

(A précis of the article “How products induce regulatory fit: evidence from the health domain”. Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)